Hi Matt,

Good point about Nobz & Squat Exo Armour. The Exo-Armour I definitely would class as Terminator style, would have to reacquaint myself with the Ork rules to see what I thought about the Nobz armour.

The NetEpic Gold unit statistics tables split units into categories of Infantry, Cavalry, Walkers, Vehicles, etc. so that was why I was trying to use that shorthand. I haven't read your Dreadnought rules yet Matt, but as the rules stand there are some Dreads that only have a save of 5+.

I'd prefer that the bonuses aren't available against any infantry with a fixed saving throw, Walkers, Vehicles, etc. but I'm willing - as always - to go with the majority view on this one.

_________________
Clickable links for more Epic goodness:

Life of Die Channel including Epic Podcasts and Battle Reports

Epic 40K Players Page on Facebook
Net Epic Evolution Rules
Net Epic War! Campaign Rules

Perhaps: "This ability is only effective against Infantry and Cavalry that do not have a fixed save."

I'm including Cavalry as those units generally include an easily accessible rider or pilot that is not fully enclosed like in a vehicle or Dreadnought, and many include living mounts as well, thus it seems logical that they could be affected. Also, including Cavalry might make Banshee and Scorpion units more attractive to use, as they would have more valid targets.

As a thought, we could add (at least to the Banshee) that it also affects any fully living target, regardless of type, that does not have a fixed save. This would open up most Tyranid units as valid targets, as well as many Kroot, Daemons, and a few other sundries here and there.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

I agree that the rule change needs to be for Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions, rather than on other units, otherwise it becomes horribly messy.

I'm not so keen on trying to write a ruling about different tiers of saves though. If we're going to have a rule about saves, I'd just say, as has been proposed by Magnus that the ability only works against infantry and cavalry without a fixed saving throw. This rules out vehicles from being affected, as well as certain elite infantry types.

_________________

Hi!

I would agree that the clarification made by Magnus is the most simple and direct way to get what was intended.

Primarch

+1 in agreement with Magnus' definition.

_________________
Clickable links for more Epic goodness:

Life of Die Channel including Epic Podcasts and Battle Reports

Epic 40K Players Page on Facebook
Net Epic Evolution Rules
Net Epic War! Campaign Rules

i'm quite worried about what I'm reading, do you really want to add the possibility to Banshees to insta-kill infantry armored units on a 5+ ?

Banshees are perfect for ripping small vehicles/transports in close combat. If you want to rip infantry/cavalry, use striking scorpions, that what they have been made for.

It's like you are totally focusing on fighting only Space Marines but there's many other armies that don't have armored infantry. And even if the banshee howl is not effective against space marines, are you really sure you'll lose the close combat ? With a + 6 Caf and elite re-roll, howling are very good and perfect for what they are designed.

Only terminators in the SM Codex have at least the same caf, but against terminators, striking scorpions will be excellent.


About Saim-Hann: eldar players have all the good reasons to field them: Mega discount on Wind Rider Company, revenant titan as support card in exchange of very poor restrictions...OK, Saim Hann can't field the Tempest Host but no problem for 2 Tempest Squadrons...

The problem is that the Banshee ability was always able to kill marines (and most other infantry) and the re-introduction of the armour save for marines nerfs this ability for them. Of course they are likely to win a few combats due to their CAF, but marine armour doesn't protect against the psychic scream, don't think it ever has.
Banshees were never designed for taking on transports or vehicles, that has been true throughout the history of 40k. Banshees and Scorpions have always been about killing infantry.

Do we just simplify things and decrease the likelihood, but increase the range of targets. 6+ against all infantry.

Matt

No. We stick to the plan!

Mattman is exactly right, the issue has arisen because of the Space Marines getting those saves back. And I may say that just because Howling Banshees psychic scream is currently ineffective against Marines (which it shouldn't be), this doesn't change my stance on Tactical Marines. They're still pish.

_________________
Clickable links for more Epic goodness:

Life of Die Channel including Epic Podcasts and Battle Reports

Epic 40K Players Page on Facebook
Net Epic Evolution Rules
Net Epic War! Campaign Rules

Hi!

I'm thinking there is a fair bit of miscommunication going on. So let me try to clarify.

The original thinking was that the banshee shriek should be effective against most infantry, including marines. The problem was terminators, where in 40k (the game) the scream had little or no chance of an effect on them. After all terminator is originally known as "tactical dreadnought armor". So they should be classified as "armored units"

I personally would be against letting this ability affect terminators or equivalent units.

It should always be ineffective against armored units.

So thus the problem. How to state the rule to affect what is needed and to exclude what is not. It seems we would be left with the option of a "wordy" clarification. Since the shorter ones we've tried still leave much to be desired.

Anyone have precise wording to cover these parameters?

A similar clarification needs to be done for striking scorpions since their mandiblasters would not be able to penetrate terminator armor (like armored units). Against them they get only 1d6 (not two and certainly not three).

Which is why I recommend that units like terminators (and equivalent) just be designated as armored units.

Primarch

Hi!

The only thing that remains to be clarified (besides the usual typo hunt), is the wording for howling banshees and striking scorpions.

I invite anyone to take a shot writing one before I attempt one sometime this week.

Thanks!

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

The only simple, non 'wordy' way that I can think of (aside from what I proposed above) to achieve what you are looking for Primarch, would be to re-classify Terminators (and any other similar units) as Walkers and give them the special rule that they move and interact with terrain as if they were Infantry (similar to Greater Daemons).

Regardless of the wording, I still feel that Cavalry should be added to their valid targets. Well, any without a fixed save anyway, which is the vast majority of Cavalry.

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator

Hi!

That was my inclination as well. Add walkers to terminators and similar units. Add cavalry to vulnerable targets.

Taking this into consideration what would be added (or removed) from the howling banshee/striking scorpion abilities to make it clear?

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Hi,

Some suggests changes from France about Eldar Army List :
Tempest squadron : cost 550
Tempest Ost : cost 1000
Saim-Hann Windrider Ost : cost 750
Dooweavers : do not use pop-up attack (dooms are too strenght with pop-up attack : no range, no save, titan-killer, ...)
Revenant Titan : we use the knight holoshield, 3+ if Charge, 4+ if Advance, 5+ if First Fire, cost 500 the twin, 3 VP per titan, Wing save : 3+ instead of 2+.
In the other armies, the number of shields varie with the size of the titans (for example : warhound has 2 shileds, Reaver has 4 shields and the Warlod has 6 shields). So the value of protect given by shield varie with the size of titan. So, why it is not the same case at the eldar army list ?
With a group of players, we use these changes since 4 years, and we think that there are ok.

What do you think about this ?

_________________
NetEpic-fr : http://netepic-fr.com/

Member of NetEpic Translation Committee.

"If you break my tea, I break your ass !" Grakor Urg Margor, the ork big boss who like tea !
(sea http://fbruntz.fr/lpt/regles/regles.html)

Hi csuia!

Your group is perhaps one of the most experienced in net epic in general, so I value your input since it has been play tested a lot.

I thought we had decided long ago on no pop ups for doom weavers (its basically artillery). Well, lots of stuff is omitted over the years. I definitely agree on this with you.

There has ALWAYS been the desire to cost the tempests at 1000 points for the company. I also agree here.

Why 550 for the squadron though, why not 500? Company discount?

I believe someone mentioned that the revenant cost was a typo or mistake. It was originally 600 for a pair, which some thought too expensive (I don't really think so), but 400 is too low.

Has your games shown 500 for the pair to be a good price?

I also agree the revenant holofield shouldn't be as good as the phantom.

In summary I agree with everything you mentioned, especially since I know its all TESTED!!

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Just had another thought about targets vulnerable to these attacks. Light Artillery usually have exposed crew that could easily be affected. We should probably include these as well.

Not adding 'Walker' to Terminators, but changing Terminators into Walker type units. Thus Terminators would no longer be listed in the 'Infantry' section of the unit summary charts, but with the Walkers instead.

If the type for Terminators (and similar units) were changed, the only thing (that I can think of) that would need to change in the HB and SS descriptions would be that they may affect Cavalry and non-robotic Light Artillery.

In other words, for Howling Banshees, instead of saying: "This attack is ineffective against targets with an Armor Save." it would say: "This attack is only effective against Infantry, Cavalry, and non-robotic Light Artillery units."

For Striking Scorpions, instead of saying: "Unfortunately they do not have sufficient penetrating power to be effective versus armored targets such as vehicles, so when engaged with vehicles or larger units, they only roll 1D6 + CAF in Close Combat." it should say something like: "Unfortunately they do not have sufficient penetrating power to be effective versus armored targets, and thus only gain this benefit against Infantry, Cavalry, and non-robotic Light Artillery units, against anything else they only roll 1d6 + CAF in Close Combat."

Do those sound good to people?

_________________
Net Epic Coordinator